This meeting is to discuss the General Affairs and Foreign Affairs Council meetings. Members may already be aware that the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Martin, will not be able to attend this meeting today as originally planned. The Minister has had to cancel his attendance at relatively short notice.
General Affairs and Foreign Affairs Councils: Discussion with Minister of State
The Leas-Cheann Comhairle, Deputy Howlin, is unable to attend as he is presiding in the House.
That will be noted. I welcome the Minister of State with responsibility for European affairs, Deputy Dick Roche.
I welcome the opportunity to give a review of agendas of next week's General Affairs Council and Foreign Affairs Council. I will also give the committee a brief account of the key issues which were discussed at the two Councils in October before resuming with the other items on the agenda today.
The General Affairs Council had a very useful discussion on preparing the ground for the October European Council and in particular on the report of the task force on economic governance. President Van Rompuy attended the dinner with Ministers on the Sunday evening and this, together with a full round table on the subsequent formal session, allowed for a full range of positions to be aired regarding the establishment of a permanent crisis mechanism. Ministers also discussed preparations for the upcoming summits in third countries. On the question of Serbia, the Council decided to refer the membership application to the Commission for an opinion while underlining the need for full co-operation with the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, ICTY and providing that further steps in the process would be taken when the Council unanimously decides that full co-operation exists.
Some final decisions on the financial and staff aspects of the European external action service were taken and the new secretary general of the service, Pierre Vimont and his chief operating officer, David O'Sullivan, an Irish citizen, were introduced to the Council.
At the Foreign Affairs Council, Ministers discussed Cuba and received a briefing from High Representative Ashton on her visit to Georgia. The Middle East peace process and the situation in Gaza were also discussed. In addition, preparations for summits with major partners were on the agenda. Commissioner Füle briefed members on the ongoing review of the European neighbourhood policy.
Deputy Bernard Durkan took the Chair.
I will be attending both of next week's Council meetings. The day will begin with the General Affairs Council. Ministers will consider issues arising in follow-up to the October European Council. In addition to economic governance issues, these matters include the outcome of the G20 Seoul summit which took place last week and also a number of forthcoming meetings such as the climate change conference in Cancún, Mexico, starting at the end of November and the summits with a number of strategic partners.
Ministers will also discuss preparations for the December European Council. The main issue for decision at the European Council concerns economic governance in Europe. Following extensive discussion at the October European Council and a process of consultations which President Van Rompuy will conduct with members of the European Council ahead of the European Council's December meeting, it is anticipated that President Van Rompuy will present for decision a report encompassing a treaty amendment text and an outline of a crisis resolution mechanism which would serve as a successor to the current European financial stability facility which is due to expire in 2013.
The December European Council is expected also to take stock of progress being made in the Council on the Commission's legislative proposals needed for the implementation of many of the recommendations of the Van Rompuy task force on economic governance which the October European Council agreed should be fast tracked, with a view to the Council and the European Parliament reaching agreement by summer 2011. The issue of how pension reform is accounted for in the implementation of the Stability and Growth Pact has been raised by a number of member states. This will be dealt with during the course of the December meeting. Technical issues are of importance to some of the newer eastern states. Separately, the December European Council will have a discussion on how spending at the European level can appropriately reflect the consolidation efforts of member states. This follows on from an initial exchange on the EU budget which took place during the October European Council.
A report will be presented on the use of video and teleconferencing at Council meetings. This report was requested by the General Affairs Council following air travel disruption caused by volcanic ash earlier this year. The report indicates that there are technical challenges and constraints around the use of such technology. It also contains a draft code of conduct and proposed operational procedures for video and teleconferences. If these challenges can be met and if a technical platform can be developed, this would offer a useful alternative under exceptional circumstances when a physical meeting is not possible.
The Commission will present its work programme for 2011. This is an information point and no substantive discussion is envisaged between Ministers. Since 2006, the Commission has transmitted its new proposals and consultation papers directly to national parliaments and invited them to provide their comments so as to improve the process of European policy formulation. The Joint Committee on European Scrutiny was due to consider it at its meeting earlier today and I am sure that the Joint Committee on European Affairs will have a subsequent discussion. I am certain the views of this committee will be of interest to the Commission as it progresses this matter over the coming year. The work programme is an extensive document, covering legislative and other initiatives in a wide range of areas which the Commission will table between now and the end of 2011. I refer to a number of the policy areas with which we agree, such as, increased jobs and growth by means of accelerating the Europe 2020 reform agenda which includes future flagship initiatives including on new skills and jobs; the global aspect to EU policy, which will be aided as the EEAS becomes fully operational.
The year 2010 has seen a number of large-scale natural disasters, beginning with the Haiti earthquake in January and the ongoing cholera outbreak and hurricane Tomas, which struck Haiti earlier this month. Pakistan suffered flooding in August and September. A number of other crises arose in countries, including in Niger and Indonesia.
On the whole, the EU can be pleased with its response to Haiti and other crises. However, there is a sense that more could be done to improve our collective impact, coherence and visibility. Consequently, the Commission has developed a communication to the Council and Parliament setting out a series of measures aimed at strengthening the EU's ability to respond to disasters. The General Affairs Council will be briefed on the content of the communication. In essence the Commission proposes enhanced co-operation between the various response mechanisms operating at EU and individual member state level, such as Ireland's rapid response initiative. This would entail better planning and early warning systems and the identification in advance of resources that could be deployed in an emergency. The proposals would potentially help the EU respond more quickly and effectively in the event of a major disaster. It is likely that draft Council conclusions on the proposals will be considered at the December meeting.
The Foreign Affairs Council will begin by discussing Sudan, which is on the agenda at the request of several member states, including Ireland, and will be on the agenda in December. With the referendum on self-determination for southern Sudan rapidly approaching on 9 January, it is imperative that the EU and the wider international community remain fully engaged in the preparations for this key event. We also need to discuss possible scenarios for the aftermath of the referendum. Short Council conclusions with a political focus on supporting the fulfilment of the comprehensive peace agreement in Sudan have been drafted for this meeting. Consideration of how the EU can contribute to a post-referendum situation is also needed. I expect that the December Foreign Affairs Council will focus on more operational conclusions.
The Foreign Affairs Council will discuss the preparations for several important upcoming summits. The third EU-Africa summit will take place in Tripoli on 29-30 November. The overarching theme of the summit is investment, economic growth and job creation. The drafting of a declaration from the summit is at an advanced stage. It is understood from the Libyan hosts that Sudanese President Bashir, who is under indictment from the International Criminal Court, will not attend.
An issue which is not formally on the agenda of the summit but which may be raised by African partners is that of economic partnership agreements. Ireland believes that the summit provides a valuable opportunity for dialogue to recreate momentum in the negotiations, on the basis of the original shared commitment to economic partnership agreements as development instruments which promote economic growth and regional integration.
The EU-India summit scheduled for 10 December will also be discussed. This summit was rescheduled from October to allow more time to progress the negotiations on a comprehensive free trade agreement. The free trade agreement negotiations are progressing well and both sides are seriously engaged with a view to concluding the talks in 2011. There will also be a focus on improving co-operation in a range of other areas, including counter-terrorism, peacekeeping and anti-piracy. The post-Lisbon context and the growing importance of India on the international stage provide a timely opportunity to assess the EU-India relationship. It is in the interest of the EU to deepen the dialogue on economic and trade aspects as well as political ones, to draw the EU and India closer on key global issues. The summit will be an important element in launching this process.
The EU-Russia summit, which will take place in Brussels on 7 December, is also on the agenda for the Council. The expected areas for discussion at the summit include the global economic environment, climate change, EU-Russia relations and regional and international issues. The summit will also provide an opportunity to review progress on the partnership for modernisation initiative, which was the focus of the last summit in Rostov-on-Don on 31 May and 1 June. The EU-Russia summit should build on the improvements we have seen in EU-Russia relations over the past two years. A better understanding between the EU and Russia will assist in addressing issues such as the protracted conflicts in our common neighbourhood. Russia is also an increasingly important economic partner for the EU.
The OSCE summit in Astana on 1 December and 2 December, which will be the first such gathering in 11 years, will provide an opportunity to give this organisation fresh impetus and direction. Negotiations on a summit political declaration have been in progress over recent weeks. The EU has set out its position: the declaration must be balanced, must contain language on the protracted conflicts and must include an unequivocal reaffirmation of existing OSCE commitments across all three OSCE dimensions. As OSCE chair in 2012, Ireland is anxious that the 56 participating states of the organisation can agree a work plan for the coming years. We are currently chairing the forum for security co-operation the Vienna-based OSCE body which deals with politico-military issues, and are working to forge a consensus on the forum's input into the summit document. Some progress has been achieved in this respect and there is a growing expectation that, following the summit, important work will begin on updating the Vienna declaration, which relates to arms control and confidence and security-building measures. Over the past three decades, the OSCE has played a vital role in preserving peace and promoting democratic values. It is important that the summit provides the organisation with a renewed focus and strengthened capability to continue this work.
Over lunch on 22 November, Ministers will discuss with High Representative Ashton the main elements of her forthcoming report to the European Council on the EU's policy on engagement with strategic partners, both in the immediate term and within a longer time frame. The European Council on 16 September looked at how the EU can better manage its external agenda and more effectively engage with key strategic partners. EU leaders agreed on key themes to guide Europe's external policy, including the requirement for the EU to more clearly define its strategic interests and identify the leverage it has to achieve them when it comes to high level engagements with third country partners. EU leaders asked High Representative Ashton to identify the areas of policy interest for the EU in its relations with all its strategic partners, with a view to ensuring best possible outcomes for the EU at future summit meetings with the countries concerned.
The Council will discuss the latest developments in the Middle East peace process over lunch. As members will be aware, the direct talks between Israel and the Palestinian Authority, which began in Washington on 2 September, have effectively been suspended since the end of September, due to Israel's refusal to renew the partial moratorium on settlement construction confined to the West Bank, which had applied for the preceding ten months. Intensive diplomatic contacts between the US and the two sides are continuing in an effort to persuade Israel to restore the moratorium in a format that will allow the direct talks to resume. Following Prime Minister Netanyahu's visit to the US last week and meeting with the Secretary of State Mrs. Clinton last Thursday, there is now some modest hope that the moratorium will be reinstated in the coming weeks. There has been much speculation about reported US offers to the Israeli Government in exchange for reinstating the moratorium. However, it ultimately remains a matter for the two sides to devise a formula, with the Obama Administration, which will allow direct talks to resume.
Ireland and our EU partners remain strongly supportive of the US-led efforts, which represent the best hope of getting the two sides into direct discussions. High Representative Ashton has set out the EU's position on recent Israeli actions, including the announcement last week of plans for construction of 1,300 new housing units, in a statement she issued on 9 November. I urge Israel to desist from all actions that undermine the current prospects for peace and to respond to the clear request of the international community for the reinstatement of a complete moratorium on all settlement construction, including in east Jerusalem.
Greater efforts to improve the situation on the ground in Gaza, particularly as regards reconstruction and resumption of exports, are also urgently required and would constitute an equally important confidence building measure at this critical juncture.
From reports by Mr. John Ging that have been widely publicised in recent days, it is clear that there has been little substantive improvement in the overall situation in Gaza since last May's flotilla incident. For the moment, the EU must continue to direct all its energies to supporting the US-led efforts and encouraging both sides to take the necessary steps to restore confidence in each other's intentions and allow direct talks to resume.
The Council is also due to discuss Lebanon over lunch, focusing in particular on the tense internal situation arising from the ongoing investigations of the special tribunal for Lebanon into the assassination of former Prime Minister Hariri in February 2005. Ministers are likely to endorse a clear message of support for the special tribunal and to make clear that the search for justice and combating impunity is entirely compatible with consolidating the peace and stability which Lebanon has largely enjoyed since the end of the 2006 war with Israel.
High Representative Ashton is expected to brief the Council on the latest developments on Iran and the question of its nuclear programme. Tentative agreement has now been reached between the High Representative and the chief Iranian nuclear negotiator, Special Envoy Jalili, to schedule the first direct talks in more than a year between what is known as the E3 + 3, namely the United Kingdom, France, Germany, the United States, Russia and China and Iran. These talks are to take place on 5 December at a venue still to be determined. That is a welcome development. I hope that Iran will engage seriously in these discussions, including on the concerns about its ongoing nuclear activities. Any serious diplomatic engagement with Iran on the many issues which arise in terms of that country, including the very serious human rights situation, is to be welcomed and ultimately represents the only realistic option for achieving progress in our relations.
Recent developments in Iraq, including the deteriorating security situation and the rise in sectarian attacks against members of the Christian community in that country, will also be discussed. The EU, through High Representative, Cathy Ashton, has already condemned the recent upsurge in sectarian violence, including the appalling attack on innocent worshippers at Our Lady of Salvation Church in Baghdad on 31 October, which resulted in the deaths of 52 people. It is clear that those who wish to see Iraq return to large-scale sectarian violence still represent a very real threat. The recent agreement on formation of a new power-sharing government in Iraq, led by outgoing Prime Minister Maliki, is therefore very much to be welcomed as a sign of the overwhelming desire of most Iraqis to see peace and stability restored. I hope that agreement can be speedily reached on putting the new power-sharing government in place, so as to allow it to begin to address the need for an improvement in basic security in Iraq and to legitimately confront all those who incite sectarian and ethnic hatred.
Our discussion of Burma at next week's Council will allow us to assess developments there in light of the recent release of Daw Aung San Suu Kyi. As members are aware, she was released shortly after the parliamentary elections held on 7 November, which were deeply flawed and failed to meet international standards. I know that all members of this committee will join me in welcoming the release of Aung San Suu Kyi. I also express my admiration for all of those who campaigned tirelessly on her behalf, particularly here in Ireland. As the only democratically elected leader in Burma's history she continues to be held in high regard both by Oireachtas Members and the Irish public. We will listen closely to her assessment of the situation and any advice she might offer to the international community.
While we welcome her release and look forward to reports of her discussions with EU representatives in Rangoon, we are under no illusions regarding conditions on the ground in Burma. Not only was the electoral process completely flawed but more than 2,000 political prisoners remain in detention. Given the track record of the Burmese regime, I would caution against undue optimism. Notwithstanding that, the EU is ready to react positively to any moves toward genuine reform.
Under any other business we will discuss the status of the European Union and the United Nations. The High Representative is expected to brief Ministers on developments on the status of the EU at the United Nations. As committee members will recall, the UN General Assembly voted on 14 September to defer consideration of a resolution on this issue, which is necessary to enable the High Representative to speak for the European Union at the UN General Assembly and to reflect other changes under the Lisbon treaty. The aim of these procedural changes is to enable the EU to play a more effective role and have a stronger and more coherent voice in the UN; they do not affect the status or rights of other members of the UN. The High Representative will update Ministers on the efforts under way to explain the procedural changes sought to our partners in the UN. The objective has been to highlight the importance of the issue to the EU, and to listen and find ways to take account of the range of views of the UN membership on the matter.
That concludes my comments on the agenda for the General Affairs Council and the Foreign Affairs Council meetings next week. As always I am grateful to have had this opportunity to set out my views to Members of the Oireachtas. I will be very pleased to hear the comments of the committee and to take questions.
I thank the Minister of State. A comprehensive and important agenda lies ahead at the Council meeting in particular. One cannot but notice that issues of major importance are being discussed at every meeting. Our interests are to the fore in many of those discussions. I remind committee members that our interests are being discussed as well at meetings at every level throughout the European institutions. It is important that we are always present, that we make a positive and worthwhile contribution and that we are heard.
I am concerned about the proposal for a treaty amendment. It has serious implications not only for this country but for the European Union as a unit. I strongly urge that serious consideration would be given to avoiding any amendment to the treaty at this time. It may well be that amendments are required at a later stage but I am strongly of the opinion that an amendment to a treaty now while other issues are under discussion of major and fundamental importance throughout the European Union should be avoided. Committee members have expressed that view to President Van Rompuy and other commissioners as well.
It would be in order to welcome the Chairman's comments. I agree 110% with him. It is critically important that this country is represented at all of these meetings. I make that point because of recent commentary about our swanning around Europe going to meetings. There has never been a more important time in the life of this nation for us to be fully represented and actively engaged in Europe. I am grateful for the Chairman's support on the matter. Anyone who thinks that this country's cause is served by being absent from the table in Europe is delusional. I again thank the Chairman for his comments and support.
That applies to the committee and to members of the various committees of the Houses of the Oireachtas as well. There is always a tendency to fear adverse comment. Unfortunately, commentators do not have a role to play in that part of the discussions, other than after the event but it is hugely important that the Members of Parliament elected across the member states are both visible and active and participate at all times.
I do not wish to delay the meeting other than to make a quick reference to the Middle East peace process which members will address in greater detail. I am concerned about the slow progress and the little influence the European Union as a unit seems to have. I accept there are other distracting factors throughout the European Union at the moment but it behoves European countries to address the matter in more detail.
The Minister of State referred to Haiti. There are serious fears about the cholera epidemic and the health implications for the wider population. I do not know whether the European Union and the United Nations have combined sufficiently to address that issue in what is a particularly poor country. In other countries with better infrastructure it is possible to deal with the situation more effectively. It would be negligent of the worldwide community to ignore what is happening. The worldwide community would also comment adversely if there is an inability to respond adequately to the situation.
I thank the Minister of State for his comprehensive report, which covered many issues. I will refer to some of the points raised, the first being the recent decision on Serbia's application to join the European Union. I do not know whether the Minister of State had the opportunity yesterday to read an article in The Irish Times stating the chief prosecutor criticised Serbia again for a lack of progress in producing Mr. Mladic. Those who believed I was exaggerating should note this. I ask the Minister of State to assure the committee that the application will not proceed any further until the European Union is satisfied that every possible step has been taken to bring Mr. Mladic and Mr. Hadzic to justice, and that it will not ignore the comments of the chief prosecutor.
This is a very serious issue. I understand how anxious people are to include Serbia and other states from that region in the European Union. However, if we are to have standards, let us apply them across the whole Union. It is important that no motion be brought before the Houses of the Oireachtas before the December UN meeting. I cannot remember whether the matter of the tribunal will be discussed at UN or EU level. There is deep concern in many parts of this country over rushing this measure through when the two individuals, Mladic and Hadzic, are not being brought to justice.
The next item referred to was climate change and the Cancún meeting. Having been Chairman of the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Climate Change and Energy Security, I am very much aware of the very serious problem facing the world because of climate change. While I fully support the objective, every time I see a comment from the Council of Ministers or European Union regarding the proposed cuts of 20% and the preparedness to increase this to 30% if others do likewise, I believe I am in dreamland. The reality is that there is not a chance of this target being met until the United States gets its act together. As far as I am aware, no progress whatsoever is being made in regard to getting the required legislation through Congress. There is no point continuing with the stance we have listened to over the past 12 to 18 months to the effect that we will lead the way. We are leading the way but getting nowhere. This is a problem that will not go away and urgent action is needed. We need assurance that positive steps will be identified in the Cancún negotiations. Will the Minister of State provide it?
With regard to the recent Council meeting and the proposals for stricter regimes pertaining to how member states manage their economies, and the punishments that will be imposed if they do not manage them properly, has President Van Rompuy made any contact with this country thus far? I understand he is to tour the member states. Have we decided on a position? If so, will the Minister of State indicate the position we are to take if the President visits us? Is it at the December meeting that he must make his report?
December.
It would be a retrograde step for the European Union to talk about removing voting rights from member states. This would not be a solution to this problem. Although Ireland is in the mire at present, the future of the Union is the most important issue. I, at least, fully support the steps deemed necessary to ensure we adhere to rules and regulations but I can think of ways to punish member states other than removing their voting rights.
I am very pleased some movement is occurring in regard to a rapid response initiative dealing with disasters throughout the world. This is very much linked to the Minister of State's comments on EU negotiations on our place in the United Nations, which comments I agreed with recently. On various occasions I have had the opportunity to comment on them. The European Union is a major contributor to the United Nations' overall running costs. Am I correct that it contributes almost 40%? It is only right and proper that we have a very serious role in decision-making. This highlights what I and the Minister of State have been saying about the need to use both battle groups and rapid response corps to offer immediate assistance, through the Untied Nations, to countries such as Pakistan, Haiti and any other that suffers from a disaster. Therefore, it is important that the Union as a whole have a say in how it goes about helping at UN level.
I fully support the idea of a rapid response by the European Union, be it through the battle groups, which are ideal in many respects for providing various forms of substance, or the rapid response corps. I also support calls for having a greater say in the decision-making process of the United Nations. I hope this issue will be pursued strenuously by Ireland, which leads in this matter within the European Union. Perhaps the Minister of State and the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Deputy Martin, will assure us through leadership in respect of having a proper say and having a rapid response force.
I welcome the Minister of State, Deputy Roche, and his officials from the Department of Foreign Affairs. I always feel the attendance in the Houses of ambassadors and secretaries from the embassies, particularly of the European Union, is very welcome. This provides a focus for the work of the Joint Committee on European Affairs.
I note the work taking place on continuing problems in the Middle East. The European Union should be involved more effectively in that region. It tends to depend on the US-led initiatives. There is no doubt but that the United States has influence in Israel but the European Union is providing considerable funding to Palestine at present, and rightly so. The building of 1,200 to 1,300 units in east Jerusalem is an indication that Israel is not interested in a peace settlement there. What is really happening is that the Palestinian lands are being taken and populated by the Israelis. The more settlements that are built, the less likely it is that there will be a peace settlement in the Middle East.
I note Mr. John Ging's report on Gaza. He is doing great work on behalf of the United Nations in the Gaza area. There is no reason that area should not be given proper humanitarian aid and support. Aid should not be prevented from entering the region by Israel. I asked Minister of State to raise this issue, which was brought to our attention recently. The committee received a submission on EU Directive No. 2005/29/EC with regard to the labelling of goods from the region. They should be clearly indicated. Goods coming from Israeli-occupied Palestinian areas should be clearly identified so that we know exactly where they have been produced. I support the Minister of State's position in calling for the position of High Representative Baroness Ashton to be clearly identified at UN level, where she would have a role. It is very important in terms of the the Middle East that she have a voice in that particular regard.
I also want to commend him on outlining the situation so comprehensively. The EU-Indian summit, I believe, will be of great significance from our viewpoint as a major exporting country within the European Union, and I certainly urge that the free trade agreement be expedited. It would assist our exporters. There is a very healthy market for exports in India at the moment, one we could work on. The same applies to the Islamic Republic of Iran, where we have a very strong position. I was there as a trade Minister of State, and I certainly hope that whatever restrictions are on the Department of Foreign Affairs, our embassy in Iran would be retained. It has very good growth potential and we have a very good relationship with Iran, one we should build on. Embassies and diplomatic missions are crucial as regards trade and generally speaking the ambassadors are 100% focused on this. I urge that those missions be retained and indeed, developed.
I trust the Senator is not losing sight of human rights issues.
One does not lose sight of human right issues, but without these matters in place we should not have any presence in China and elsewhere, and perhaps the United States either, because some aspects to human rights in Iraq are not all that hopeful.
On Turkey's application, that seems to have fallen off the agenda of the meetings, because of the Turkish-Cypriot situation, and I hope the Minister of State will endeavour to have that put back on the agenda for consideration, given that dialogue is needed on the reunification of Cyprus.
I thank the Minister of State for his presentation and I have a couple of questions about a possible plan for a treaty amendment text. Will he say whether it would involve a referendum here in Ireland, if that were to be the case? Why is it necessary in any event? Why should the EU get into this type of thing at all? Would we have a veto over a decision, and what is the position of other countries in that regard? I am vague about this, but is there a mechanism under the Lisbon treaty which provides for alliances of smaller states? In the event, is anything like that happening involving Ireland, or at all?
On the video and teleconferencing proposal, obviously that is a good idea. I absolutely agree with the Minister of State that we have to travel. Being involved with people in a room is much better than a video meeting, but has the rotation of Council meetings ever been considered? Why not have one in Ireland, say, at one stage and in other European countries at other times? This is something that should be actively considered in deference to the feeling of remoteness often shared by citizens of the EU.
There has been much negative reference recently to the work of politicians and what we allegedly do. I compliment the Minister of State, however, on accompanying us when we went on the delegation to the EU and met various Commissioners and so on. He was present with us at some of the meetings and I thank him for that. I should emphasise that he travelled in economy class like the rest of us.
I always do.
That type of thing never gets media coverage. They tend to be interested in a story only when the travel is first-class or whatever, so I just thought I should mention that. On the Middle East, at this stage I sound like a broken record but it would not take much for the Minister of State and his officials to inject a proper balance into statements. I do not have any difficulty with what is being said, but take the sentence, "The primary onus remains on Israel to demonstrate that it is genuinely committed to achieving a comprehensive negotiated settlement at this time". I would have thought the onus is on both sides. As the Minister of State has mentioned on many occasions, there are two sides, and the point should be made that Hamas is not engaging at all. It gets involved in talks to do with prisoners being released so that type of negotiation is going on which is encouraging, but I agree with the points that have been made here about the settlements, the need for a moratorium, especially the need for serious negotiations and all of that. However, it should be recognised that there are difficulties. It is not as if there are no problems on the Palestinian side. Hamas is in control of Gaza and is not at the table. It could be and George Mitchell has outlined the things it could do to get involved. I understand, from reports, that President Mahmoud Abbas is trying to do some work in that regard.
On Gaza, are any further talks going on towards easing the blockade? When in Brussels recently we met an official who works directly under Baroness Ashton, and he was very impressive. It might be helpful if we could have Baroness Ashton attend this committee at some stage, or somebody directly involved in her work. I thought that official's presentation was very balanced and informative.
The Minister of State is very welcome and I thank him for such a good report, both on what has happened and what is being planned. I would like to touch on three points, one of them being President Van Rompuy's taskforce on economic governance. I imagine that economic governance will play a very large part, particularly at this meeting in December. In terms of the new skills and jobs initiative I have a concern that there is not sufficient understanding in Europe, as there is in general in business, that jobs will not be created by the states. Successful jobs will be created by private enterprise and I am not sure if this is understood. I got to know Ms Elaine Chao some years ago, who was the US Secretary for Labour. She said her job was to create the environment so that private enterprise could create the jobs, since it was unlikely that long-term jobs could be created by the state.
I believe there is not a full understanding about the need for Europe to be competitive if it is to compete with other parts of the world. The more we strangle and put restraints on Europe the more difficult it will be for us to create those jobs, and the new skills and jobs initiative will fail in the long term. The point I am leading up to is that there is a misunderstanding that a higher tax rate will bring in more money. What happens in business is that sometimes when the price is reduced one takes more money in, and the Irish corporation tax rate of 12.5% is not understood elsewhere, it seems to me. It is not understood how successful it has been for us. Moreover, those countries that increase their tax rates damage and dampen the opportunity for businesses to bring in more business and to compete with other parts of the world. I believe this point must be made clear. While it will be stated that this rate is not under threat under present circumstances, it will be under threat unless we make the valid economic argument that a lower tax rate can bring in more money, is more successful and on that basis, makes Europe more competitive.
I wish to raise two points with regard to the Foreign Affairs Council, one of which pertains to the question of Somalia. I was jolted last week, on the release of a British couple on payment of a ransom, to discover that many other people are being held for ransom in Somalia or in Somalian waters. They actually are in international, not Somalian, waters. Can Europe do anything to avoid this practice continuing? I understand that approximately 500 people are being held at present and that ransoms are being paid. How can this be solved or is there a solution? The aforementioned British couple had decided not to enter Somalian waters and had travelled several hundred kilometres to the east to avoid it but still were taken and brought to captivity there.
The second point regarding the Foreign Affairs Council concerns the question of the European Union-India summit that is due to take place and that was postponed from October until December. In the meantime, President Obama has made a high-profile visit to India and it appears as though he definitely has recognised the value of Indian trade. I am unsure of the reason for the postponement until December of the summit that was due to be held in October - perhaps it was because President Obama was coming. Is there a danger that the European Union's postponement of that summit represents a lost opportunity or was there another reason for its postponement? If the European Union is to develop trade with India, it should be high on our list of priorities and one should avoid anything that hands over the initiative to a competitor, which in this case the United States clearly is.
Finally, I wish to touch on the point regarding videoconferencing and teleconferencing. In business terms, this now has become so commonplace that people are becoming used to not always being obliged to travel to have a meeting. I seek the Minister of State's view in this regard. When he talks about the need for Ireland to be present, I acknowledge that sometimes the networking is not necessarily done at the meeting itself but during the coffee and lunch breaks or at other times. Does the Minister of State consider it still to be necessary to attend to derive the benefits of such networking or can one do this through videoconferencing and teleconferencing?
I thank the Minister of State for his comprehensive proposals and report to members. I share the Chairman's opinion on any proposed change in the European treaties or anything that would necessitate a referendum. Every mechanism should be explored to prevent this from happening at present. As for Sudan, the comprehensive peace agreement provided for the referendums to go ahead on 9 January. Is the Foreign Affairs Council considering how it can contribute to a post-referendum situation? Is it expected to consider more operational conclusions, possibly to deal with different scenarios that may arise following the referendum? In respect of Burma, while all members welcome the release of Aung San Suu Kyi, as the Minister of State noted, more than 2,000 political prisoners remain in detention in Burma and fundamental human rights still are being denied. What efforts might the Foreign Affairs Council make to induce the Burmese regime to move to a transition towards democracy?
In conclusion, I share Deputy Tuffy's concern that Ireland should try to achieve a greater balance in respect of its comments on the Middle East. While I acknowledge this can be very difficult at times, it is absolutely necessary that Ireland should be seen to be fair and objective in this area. I make this point as one who has been highly critical of Israeli actions in particular, as well as Palestinian actions, in the past.
I welcome the Minister of State and thank him for his fine presentation. I pay tribute to him and to all his colleagues for their huge workload at present at both European and international levels. I agree with Deputy Barrett with regard to the Serbian application that it is of critical importance that there be absolute co-operation with the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia. This has gone on for far too long and the Union must assert a position to the effect that there must be absolute transparency and co-operation before a new member state may be admitted to the Union. The Minister of State also might provide members with an update on the current position in respect of a number of other applications for membership of the Union. Some of them have been extant for many years and should have been dealt with long ago in a positive manner. Perhaps the aforementioned applications did not get the required support as although Ireland supported them, others did not at that time.
The situation in the Middle East is serious and one is faced with a two-speed operation in the entire Middle East process, namely, with an international speed in one arena but with a domestic speed on the ground. It is of critical importance that a bilateral effort between the European Union, led by High Representative Ashton, in co-operation with Secretary of State Clinton and the United States, should be able to persuade the Israelis that they must freeze their actions on construction and so on until such time as agreement can be reached on a way forward. I refer to the two-state solution that Ireland has consistently supported for decades and it is important that we make clear that position.
When speaking of the United States and the United Nations, I agree with colleagues on the importance, for the strength of the United Nations and the democratic role it must sustain, of a balance in respect of the contributions made to it and regarding the requirements to underpin the entire organisation financially. It is important that some of the bigger players therein make their contributions on time, rather then having the United Nations hamstrung due to lack of resources at times. Moreover, full membership of the United Nations for the European Union on a permanent basis would be highly important for the future and would make a huge contribution to bringing sustainability to the sustenance of peace and in dealing with crises and conflicts across the world.
I also agree with Senator Quinn's comments. There is both a global and a European financial crisis, which poses a serious challenge for the Union. On the other hand, if we are to underpin and manage this crisis, economic support also is needed and more practical, tangible measures must taken by the Union to drive the job creation agenda across the member states, taking into account member states' different skill-sets. I refer to the traditional cultures that exist vis-à-vis certain sectors of work that are traditional to various countries. I believe there is capacity, if it is examined in detail, whereby the Union could assist in accelerating job creation in order that the capital required to sustain our economic position can be serviced by additional jobs and revenue coming into the various exchequers. This also would provide competitiveness and sustainability within the eurozone. This will be very important for the next five years in particular within the Union, taking into account its capacity and population, as well as the greater role in global affairs that I believe it has yet to assert to its full capacity.
I warmly welcome the release of Aung San Suu Kyi. Ireland has consistently supported her and in the past, while serving in different Ministries, I was glad to have been able to speak on behalf of our country and we always got tremendous support in this regard. I hope that as a result of her release, the Union, with the United Nations, will be able to ensure that democracy will prevail and that the people of Burma or Myanmar will be the final arbiters in how their country proceeds into the future.
I wish to raise two points. The first pertains to funding for members going to Europe. This joint committee should reaffirm its full support for a continuation of a policy of sending some of our best people to Europe to speak with a single voice on Ireland. I am highly conscious that from the outset, Ireland embraced the European project. We had a tendency to send those who were among the best in the fields of politics and administration and it served the country well. To believe someone will engage on the nuances of what is occurring in Ireland without sitting down to talk to people and establishing relationships is foolhardy. Cutting back on necessary funding would constitute a poor decision, particularly at a time when we must look to the European Union more than ever for help to grow the economy and, if necessary, to receive funding for our banks. I reaffirm that there is a need to continue to send the best people and fund the venture properly, albeit not extravagantly.
Will the Minister of State continue his consideration of the European Union's relationship with Russia? There is still an unwitting mentality towards Russia that should have been dispelled many years ago, although I am sure the Minister of State does not share in it. We need to engage fully with our largest neighbour. The opportunities are almost limitless, given that it spans 11 time zones, the extent of its resources and its population. We should first examine the opportunities available on our doorstep and the diamonds on our feet and then engage with China and countries in the Far East.
The Minister of State has been given a flavour of what members believe are the issues. Having regard to the points made by a number of speakers, this is as critical a time in the history of Europe as any dealt with in the annals of history. We do not seem to fully realise how important it is; I am certain the same applies to commentators throughout Europe. It must be borne in mind, therefore, that this is not a time for people within or without the Union to score points off of one another. There is a danger that ultra-nationalism, jingoism and rhetoric could take over which could have damaging and ever-lasting effects on the cohesiveness of Europe. We must ensure we understand one another, but we cannot do this unless we engage in dialogue.
Various economic theorists bring forward their theories daily, almost by the hour and minute. Where were they for the past ten or 15 years? Why were they so silent? Why were they on the bandwagon rolling along in Ireland and elsewhere in Europe as if nothing was wrong? Expert opinion is fine, but it is not always right. Good judgment is required in this country and throughout the European Union.
Each member has referred to the fundamental issues that are to the fore and must be addressed. We can always learn lessons from what occurred in an earlier age. We can discuss how interest rates were low in one favoured country or another, but they were low all over the world. That is the reality. Had experts been in control of some countries, including Ireland, some developments would not have occurred, yet they were in control elsewhere and the same developments occurred.
As Members of Parliament, we must understand our colleagues in other national parliaments, their concerns and how the emerging political problems affect them. We need to be able to make a meaningful contribution, be ever present and articulate opinions that are relevant not only to this country but also the European Union.
I thank the Chairman and members. To pick up on the Chairman's last point, if we do not learn from history, we are condemned to repeat it. It is great to be a hurler on the ditch who knows all of the answers after the event, but the Chairman is correct, that all of Europe, not just Ireland, is in a different position. One thing is for certain - if we do not hang together, we will surely hang separately.
I will address the specific issues raised. On the concerns about treaty changes, I agree with a variety of points made by members on the Van Rompuy report. Let us cast our minds back to the debate on the Lisbon treaty which was supposed to achieve institutional change in the European Union and bring to an end all of the navel-gazing within the Union for at least a decade. I agree that it would be absurd for us to become involved in another process leading to mass treaty change. If we were to seek such change, we would need another convention, involve national parliaments and go to the nth degree in terms of ratification procedures. The Union would exhaust itself.
Deputy Barrett referred to the removal of voting rights from member states. It is a union of equal members, big and small. This was the core issue thrashed out during the years when the Convention on the Future of Europe met. Time and again the point was made that, if we did not respect the essential equality of member states, the core feature that had kept the European Union together, would be lost. The secret is that it is a unique union of equal states. We all value our sovereignty equally, from the largest to the smallest, but in a limited way we are prepared to pool sovereignty to achieve better outcomes. It would be foolhardy and destructive to begin discussing a punishment based on denying the equality of member states. I agree with Deputy Barrett in that respect.
Concerning the Van Rompuy report, at the end of the meeting the President was charged with reverting to us. We must respect the concerns of member states. Our constitutional position does not predominate; we must respect the positions of others. For example, Germany has a constitutional court that will make a judgment in early spring, probably March, on the legitimacy of the bailout arrangements to 2013. The German Chancellor and her Government have as much right to express their concerns about their position as the Irish Government does in terms of its position. We must respect their right to do so.
President Van Rompuy has been charged with examining relatively modest changes under the existing treaty mechanism. Deputy Tuffy raised a particular point. A treaty cannot be changed unless there is unanimity. However, the Lisbon treaty provides for the passing of targeted and specific changes that do not have a fundamental effect. In Ireland's case, the Crotty judgment makes it clear that a referendum is only necessary when a substantial movement of powers to the European Union is proposed. It is not just Ireland that has a constitutional position to protect. We must respect that Germany has constitutional concerns. It must respect that we have constitutional concerns also. The cement that keeps us together in the Union is respect for one another's constitutional position and our equality. In a famous incident during the course of the Convention on the Future of Europe Valéry Giscard d'Estaing commented on some smaller states. I held up a copy of the Treaty of Rome and recommended that it was worth reading from time to time, as it identified the essential equality of member states. There was applause among representatives of big and small countries because equality is recognised. President Van Rompuy must produce a report that will satisfy these concerns. As Deputy Barrett stated, there is wide-scale recognition that economic governance has to be placed on a better basis. As we know from the challenges that face not only Ireland but other member states, we exist in fairly hostile waters and there are many white sharks in those waters. We have to keep calm and focused and not lose the head. What Europe has to do, and what we have to do, in the weeks and days ahead is to accept that there are significant weaknesses in the construct of the euro which we have to address. It is in everybody's interest that they be addressed. I agree with the comments made by almost all committee members that this is not a time for any member state to get a clever notion into its head that somehow or other playing beggar-my-neighbour with any other nation is cute politics. That is the stupid politics. If anybody feels that Ireland is in some way weakened to the point that we can have a fundamental issue attacked, they are sorely mistaken. I will return to this point.
I have dealt with the issue of the task force. Deputies Barrett, Treacy and Tuffy touched on a number of issues with regard to Serbia and I will deal with them together. Yesterday, I read an article in The Irish Times about Mladic, in particular the chief prosecutor’s views. I would have to say that a more positive view is taken of the efforts by Serbia in other media; one pays one’s price and one reads one’s article. We are aware of the article. The chief prosecutor has made comments in Belgrade on his expectations about his next report. Ultimately, Ministers can make decisions only on the basis of the chief prosecutor’s official reports to the Security Council and his briefings to the foreign affairs council. Mr. Brammertz is due to present his next report to the United Nations shortly and we should wait to see it.
We are due a visit shortly from the Serbian Foreign Minister; the business is scheduled for 23 November. This committee will have the opportunity to meet him during his visit and to make clear to him the points that have been made. I agree with the points made by Deputies Barrett, Treacy and others on United Nations representation for Europe. There is something quite bizarre about the fact that we provide 40% but have the same status as a type of NGO-----
An observer.
With all due respect to NGOs, Europe is a significant player and this issue has to be dealt with. It is undeniable that major changes on the global stage are under way. We have enacted arrangements in the European Union to give us a common voice in certain areas and it is not only in Europe's interests, but in the interests of the United Nations if it is to stay relevant, that Europe has a proper place there.
On the issue of Cancun, I agree with the central thesis put forward by Deputy Barrett. Europe has a responsibility to the rest of the world, but the rest of the world has an equal responsibility to the planet. When 1 tonne of carbon goes up, it does not matter whether it goes up from Dublin or Delhi; it is 1 tonne of carbon and the damage is done. We really have to stop the idea that Europe has a particular and overriding responsibility to take all the pain. Yes, we are committed to 20% and yes we would commit to 30%, provided that others do some of the lifting. The heavy lifting cannot be left to Europe alone. In particular, our good friends and allies, the United States, have to step up to the plate, as must Russia, India, China and all those other nations. Yes, some of the more rapidly developing states can state the industrial revolution did not start there and neither did the pollution, but it does not matter a toss where it started. The pollution is still going into the atmosphere and we all have a responsibility. Ireland, together with its EU partners, will have a strong interest in tracking climate change at Cancun and making sure the agreements that come from there are appropriate.
On the idea of Europe and the EU rapid response force, I agree with the point made by Deputies Treacy and Barrett. It is important that Europe has a proper response force, and that commentators in Ireland leave behind the mythology we have created over 30 years of derisively ridiculous debates on the issue that somehow or other the EU establishing a rapid response force is a threat to our neutrality, our way of life, our language, or whatever it is that one will hear next. The idea that we can sit on our hands and look at hideous things happening anywhere in the world is a myth. The idea that we can paralyse human support or a reaction of human decency because we are having arid debates in this country is a disservice. If we look at it, the capacity of the European Union to assist, particularly where there are disasters or challenges is absolutely vast and we should take off the shackles. We should get on with the job and make absolutely certain that those arrangements are in place sooner rather than later. If we look at the human misery in Haiti or at the human misery visited by the floods in Pakistan, the reality of it is that we are all God's children. We are all equal; the parent of a child faced with plague in Haiti is the same as a parent whose child is faced with plague here. We have a responsibility and if we believe we are what we say we are, then we have to exercise it.
Turning to the Middle East, many good contributions were made. Progress is necessary. I agree with the point that obviously there must be balance. There must be an understanding in public comments about what it is that informs Israeli attitudes. Any nation that has come through the horrors of the first half of the previous century has a right to defend itself. Every nation has a right to defend itself. However, at the same time there is a responsibility on the Israeli Government in particular to play a more constructive role than it is playing. We expect more from governments than we do from terrorist organisations.
Senator Leyden, who touched on the previous matter also touched on the issue of Iran and I agree with him; I do not believe painting Iran into a cul-de-sac is necessarily the best way forward. I have always taken the view that finger-wagging might give us all some sort of feeling of moral importance but finger-wagging seldom resolves anything. Iran is a nation with great civilisation. The human rights issues it has at present violate its own traditions, but that is not for me to say. We cannot tolerate the idea that a woman would be taken out, that a pit would be dug and that she would be buried up to her shoulders and then have her body destroyed by rocks. That is not something about which we can be silent; nor can we be silent about the risks being taken on the nuclear side. However, at the same time we have to keep engaging with Iran, not only from the point of view of trade but from the point of view of trying to find solutions.
Senator Leyden mentioned Turkey. Yesterday, Turkey's chief negotiator, Mr. Bagis, was in Dublin. Recently, I had a meeting with him in Istanbul and I met him again yesterday. Turkey has a very impressive story to tell and it is very important that people who make comment on Turkey and its position vis-à-vis Europe do not do so from a position of stereotypical images. It is a very rapidly growing nation. Successive Irish Governments have always taken the view that if the objective criteria are met there is no reason Turkey should not become a full member of the Union. It is important for us to state this. If the criteria, which we as Europeans have set, are met then there is no reason to be other than welcoming.
A number of points were made about the blockade of Gaza. My view and the view of the Government are the same; it serves no purpose and it is wrong. I have already told Deputy Tuffy that I agree with her that the language used must be balanced. Hectoring any nation is not sensible and finger-wagging at nations is not sensible. Trying to isolate a nation and stating that it is an evil empire is not sensible. If we on this island have learned anything from the past it is that the way to solve problems, intractable and big though they may be, is through dialogue. That applies to us and equally to Israel.
Senator Quinn has taken my old text. Governments do not create jobs. The only thing that Governments can do is create the conditions within which jobs flourish. The myth that Governments create jobs refuses to die but the proof of the pudding is in the eating. Statism is not the way forward. I agree with the Senator that it is a myth to claim higher tax rates contribute to higher growth. We had high tax personal rates in the 1970s and 1980s and we know what happened then. We had a black economy which drove a coach and four through any sense of tax equity and we did not have the kind of growth we could have expected.
I acknowledge that certain issues need to be addressed in our tax structure. We are all beginning to realise that our tax base is too narrow and every Government made decisions that narrowed the base further. However, the idea that loading further pressure on businesses is going to contribute to economic growth is self-evidently a myth. A letter in one of today's newspapers suggests that we should increase our corporation tax rate to 15%. The answer is that we should only change our tax system when it is right for us to do so.
Ireland's corporation tax rate is not the lowest in Europe. The reason foreign direct investment comes to Ireland is because we have a very flexible, extremely young and well educated workforce. Our competitiveness has improved over the past two years since we got away from the Celtic tiger or pup, or whatever it was. Our tax system is only part of the mix that attracts FDI, albeit an important one. I make no apology for it. I have been asked in Europe and in this country why I am so adamant about the issue. I am adamant about it because it is in Ireland's national interest. It is my job to defend our interests and I do not give a toss whether it is fashionable to do so. I expect that if a member of Deputy Barrett's party was in my position in six months' time, he or she would take the same view.
Deputy Tuffy and Senator Quinn raised the issue of video conferencing. While video conferencing is useful for technical meetings, the real work of the European Council is not done in the Council chamber but during bilateral meetings. When I visited London earlier this week to celebrate the 25th anniversary of the Anglo-Irish Agreement, an event which was completely ignored by most of the media, I had the opportunity to make contact with opposition and Government colleagues in the UK. It would be foolhardy for us to ignore these opportunities.
Senator Quinn spoke about President Obama's trip to India and asked whether we have lost space. He raises an important issue because Europe needs to look east as well as west. Senator Hanafin touched on the same issue when he spoke about Russia. We need to get away from stereotypical images in dealing with these countries. India is a powerhouse with strong growth rates and we ignore it at our peril. I understand the EU-India summit was put off for technical reasons but I take Senator Quinn's point.
The Senator also asked about Somalia. We are supporting Operation Atalanta but, returning to Deputy Barrett's point, as an island nation we have a significant interest in what happens in those waters. Irish citizens also sail through the region. Deputy Barrett will probably have a better recollection of these events, having been a Minister for Defence, but I recall suggestions being made that support for this operation would affect our neutrality. The reality is that combatting piracy and criminality on the African coast is in our interest.
On the issue of Aung San Suu Kyi, it is worth reminding ourselves that sometimes we do good deeds as a country. The Seanad was one of the first, if not the first, parliamentary assembly to pass a resolution on this issue. I was a Senator at the time and I am very proud of our resolution. Last night the Seanad passed a Private Members' Bill prohibiting depleted uranium weapons. We will never use such weapons but it is right that every now and again somebody somewhere lights a penny candle to illuminate good elsewhere. The EU permanent representative in Rangoon has already met Aung San Suu Kyi and it is important that we in the West listen to her views about how her country is to proceed. She has spoken about dialogue and it is not up to the West, which caused many of the problems that exist in former colonies, to tell her how to do her business. We support her and we back democracy.
In regard to Senator Hanafin's comment on bilateral relations with Russia, President McAleese's successful visit to that country is an indication of its importance to us. We recently sent a trade delegation led by the Minister of State at the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Innovation, Deputy Kelleher, and I visited the country earlier this year. There was some criticism of my trip because we held St. Patrick's Day ceremonies in Moscow and St. Petersburg. It would be foolish if Ireland and Europe failed to deepen our relationship with Russia. I acknowledge that criticisms could be made of Russian policies and politics but we have a capacity for affinity with the Russian people. Bilateral trade between our two countries is worth €2 billion and the trade with Europe as a whole is significantly greater. We should build on these figures.
The Chairman was correct to point out this is a critical time for Ireland and Europe. If ever there was a need for calm heads, it is now. People are asking how the EU can assist us in dealing with an issue that challenges the entire eurozone. If we can stand back from the heat of the debate and look at our long-term interests, we will do better for ourselves. This is a critical time for Europe and it will be measured by how it gets through this crisis. I agree with Deputy Barrett that Europe has to address fundamental issues and President Van Rompuy will have to address them in a balanced way. He must make certain that vested interests in other member states cannot beggar their neighbours.
The Minister of State argued that governments do not create jobs and that statism is not the way forward. Throughout our history, State enterprise has been very important in providing jobs and some of the employment which will be created in the near future will be in State bodies.
I agree that has been the case on occasion. When we lacked the possibility of air links, we established a State airline which was very successful. When banks did not make credit available, we set up ICI and ACC. That is a bit of history which may be worth repeating. I do not believe in attacking the public sector but the greater number of jobs will be created in export industries, which are predominantly in the private sector.
In the cases to which the Minister of State referred, the intention was not job creation. Aer Lingus was established to create transport links, although jobs were also provided. If the objective is to create jobs, that does not work. They helped to create banking and transport systems -----
Tourist services.
They encouraged an appropriate economic climate.
I support the views expressed by Deputy Tuffy, Senator Cummins and the Minister of State on the need for balance when we talk about Israel and Palestine. It is important to remember that we succeeded in finding a resolution in Northern Ireland because all sides eventually started to talk to each other. In Israel, as in this and many other countries, there are many political parties, some on the right, some on the left, and some on the extreme right or left. We are falling into a trap by encouraging people to express views we do not share, which may lead to our being perceived to constantly attack Israel. Perception is everything in negotiations.
Two things happened recently that I never thought I would see: the establishment of an administration in Northern Ireland with the DUP and Sinn Féin sharing power at a senior level, and the historic first meeting of the North-South Parliamentary Forum, with every political party, North and South, represented in one room. That is progress.
Hear, hear.
In trying to find a solution to the difficult problem in the Middle East, balance is needed. I support the views being expressed. Let us have balance. If people are doing things, they should do them within international law and not take things into their own hands but, equally, people must have the right to defend themselves.
Thank you, Deputy. I will mention one point that I forgot. As a long-serving Member of this Parliament, as are several of the other committee members, I am always wary of teleconferencing lest something happen off-camera that we do not know about. My definition of teleconferencing is a telephone call with pictures.
Hear, hear.
I have a terrible aversion to it for good reasons that will emerge as time goes on.
I thank the Minister of State for his comments and I wish him and his colleagues luck in the negotiations that lie ahead, from the European as well as the Irish perspective. We thank his colleagues at the Department for their attendance also.
The joint committee went into private session at 1.15 p.m. and adjourned at 1.25 p.m. until 3 p.m. on Tuesday, 23 November 2010.